ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate endo-therapeutic approach to biliary anastomotic strictures is yet to be defined. AIM: To retrospectively report on the endo-therapy of duct-to-duct anastomotic strictures during 2013 in Italy. METHODS: Data were collected from 16 Endoscopy Units at the Italian Liver Transplantation Centers (BASALT study group). RESULTS: Complete endo-therapy and follow-up data are available for 181 patients: 101 treated with plastic multistenting, 26 with fully covered self-expandable metal stenting and 54 with single stenting. Radiological success was achieved for 145 patients (80%), that is, 88% of plastic multistenting, 88% of self-expandable metal stenting and 61% of single stenting (P < 0.001 vs plastic multistenting; P < 0.05 vs self-expandable metal stenting). After first-line endo-therapy failure, the patients underwent a second-line endo-therapy with plastic multistenting for 25%, fully covered self-expandable metal stenting for 53% and single stenting for 22% of cases, and radiological success was achieved for 84%, that is, 100%, 85% and 63% with plastic multistenting, self-expandable metal stenting and single stenting (P < 0.05 vs plastic multistenting or self-expandable metal stenting) respectively. Procedure-related complications occurred in 7.8% of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies. Overall, clinical success was achieved in 87% of patients after a median follow-up of 25 months. CONCLUSION: Plastic multistenting is confirmed as the preferred first-line treatment, while fully covered self-expandable metal stenting as rescue option for biliary anastomotic strictures. Single stenting has sub-optimal results and should be abandoned.
Subject(s)
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/instrumentation , Constriction, Pathologic/surgery , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Stents/classification , Adult , Aged , Biliary Tract Diseases/etiology , Biliary Tract Diseases/surgery , Cholestasis/etiology , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Female , Humans , Italy , Liver Transplantation/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Plastics , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient-centered outcomes of decompressive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (dPEG) in patients with malignant bowel obstruction due to advanced gynecological and gastroenteric malignancies. METHODS: This is a prospective analysis of 158 consecutive patients with small-bowel obstruction from advanced gynecological and gastroenteric cancer who underwent PEG or percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (PEJ) positioning for decompressive purposes from 2002 to 2012. All of them had previous abdominal surgery and were unfit for any other surgical procedures. Symptom relief, procedural complications, and post dPEG palliation were assessed. Global Quality of Life (QoL) was evaluated in the last 2 years (25 consecutive patients) before and 7 days after dPEG placement using the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS). RESULTS: dPEG was successfully performed in 142 out of 158 patients (89.8 %). Failure of tube placement occurred in 16 patients (10.1 %). In 8/142 (5.6 %) patients, dPEG was guided by abdominal ultrasound. In 3/142 patients, dPEG was CT-guided. In 14 (9.8 %) patients, who had previously undergone total or subtotal gastrectomy, decompressive percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (dPEJ) was performed. In 1/14 patients, dPEJ was CT-guided. Out of 142 patients, 110 (77.4 %) experienced relief from nausea and vomiting 2 days after PEG. Out of 142 patients, 116 (81.6 %) were discharged. The median postoperative hospital stay was 9 days (range 3-60). Peristomal infection (14 %) and intermittent obstruction (8.4 %) were the most frequent complications associated with PEG. Median survival time was 57 days (range 4-472) after PEG placement. Twenty-five patients had QoL properly evaluated with SDS score before and 7 days after dPEG. Sixteen patients (64 %) out of 25 exhibited an improvement of QoL (p < 0.05), 7 (28 %) patients exhibited a non-significant worsening of QoL (p = 0.18), and in 2 (8 %) patients, it remained unmodified. CONCLUSIONS: dPEG is feasible, effective, relieves nausea and vomiting in patients with unremitting small-bowel obstruction from advanced gynecological and gastroenteric cancer, and improves QoL.
